KDE 3.0 Beta2 was announced today after a delay due to a variety of problems. This new release should provide a great opportunity for those interested in helping hunt down bugs or simply seeing where the future of KDE is headed. Read the full announcement for details. "One of the major improvements brought by KDE 3.0 over KDE 2.2 is the Javascript/DHTML support in Konqueror. The DOM 2 model, used to render an HTML page, is now mostly implemented, and changes to the DOM tree are handled much better. The Javascript bindings and support is almost complete, faster and more stable than in KDE 2. These changes result in a much-improved rendering of dynamic websites and is something users will immediately appreciate."

Comments

I just built KDE 3 beta 2, and it's pretty nice. I have a slight problem with image loading, though. It's not the common missing-qt-image-plugin problem that's been reported. Images, for the most part, load fine. However, some larger images have problems. Attached is a screenshot that shows this. The image is one of the wallpapers that came with KDE 3. Konqueror thinks it has completely loaded the image, but it's obviously not completely loaded. Small images tend to work OK, but larger ones (around 800 pixels wide, but it's kinda arbitrary!) have this cutoff problem. I've seen it with both PNG and JPEG files.

Well, after experimenting some, I found out the why it's happening... If the image is much wider than the konqueror window ("much" being about 10-20 pixels it seems), it does the cutoff thing. If I expand konq wider than the visual screen, to at least the width of the image, it works without problems. Anyone else have this problem? You can open any small image with konq, then resize it to smaller than the width.

Note: I don't have kdegraphics installed, so if konq utilizes kview for embedding images if it's around, this behavior may not exhibit itself.

I can reproduce this cutoff thing. If the image I want to view is wider than the konqueror window I get exactly what you describe. Also expanding konquerors window to the size of the image works for me. Using KDE3 Beta2.

I don't know how it is for you but here, if you type http://apps.kde.org in your favourite browser, there are lot of chances that you got an "unknown host" most of the time.
I can only reach it from www.kde.org, by clicking on the "Applications" entry in the left menu.

In fact, a "dig apps.kde.org IN A" does not bring any "Answer Section"...
And in fact, the same search @lupinella.troll.no (which is supposed to be the DNS Authority) does not give more results.
In contrast, I've never had any problem with all (dot|developer|edu|.*).kde.org

Wouldn't it be possible to have a specific domain name for this quite critical resource ? Or at least to update this damn *.ca conf file ??

Duh !?! :o)
what a weird idea !...
All others KDE related parts are ".org" but apps are ".com" ??
For full GPL stuff ?!

Then I guess the apps site is not related to the KDE project ?
But then again I don't understand what prevents apps.kde.org to redirect to apps.kde.com... that would definetly be more consistent, to say the least.

Depends on what you mean by "related". Sure, Linux.com, Slashdot.org, even Thinkgeek.com are "related" to Linux. You can buy nice warm Tux blankets at Thinkgeek. But Thinkgeek is not directly sponsored by the same people who write the Linux kernel (although some people associated with it are friendly with them, so you have things like the Alan Cox designed tee-shirt).

In the same way, the KDE site lists links to places where you can find Konqi plush dolls... that does not mean that those sites are directly connected to the KDE Team. In the same way, kde.com is very much a "KDE site", but not directly connected to the KDE Team.

Incidently, I think my personal rule of thumb is that "KDE Official" = In KDE CVS. Since all the websites are in CVS, the only thing that I would consider official that dosen't appear to be directly in the CVS are the lists.
--
Evan

> In the same way, the KDE site lists links to places where you can find Konqi
>plush dolls...

mmmh... not quite exactly the same way.
To reach such an information, you've got to click on "Everything else" on the left menu, then "Merchandise" : then you are still on a kde.org page, and it is clearly stated that the sites listed are external (http://www.kde.org/kde-stuff.html)

In fact, every single link on www.kde.org's main page point to a kde.org site EXCEPT apps.kde.com, and there is absolutely no indication to tell you that the site is not part of the project.
You've got a simple statement "Applications" listed in the "Download" entry, as if it were a normal section of the same site, and you really ought to be very careful to notice the .org to .com change.

I find this situation very confusing.

>Incidently, I think my personal rule of thumb is that "KDE Official" = In KDE
>CVS.

Well... Indeed, indeed.
However, I somewhat doubt that this would appear as a convenient "rule of thumb" to the ordinary Joe Bean KDE user.

You were wrong with fulminating against DNS. Stop arguing, accept it. And about the GPL on .com site, this is almost as stupid as your request to rename news.uslinuxtraining.com to news.kde.org "to discuss KDE right here".

:: However, I somewhat doubt that this would appear as a convenient "rule of thumb" to the ordinary Joe Bean KDE user.

I was referring to the fact that the "official" KDE websites are in KDE's CVS server. That does not mean that you can't use freshmeat.net, apps.kde.com or download.com. Apps.k.c happens to be the leading one - that's why it's listed... kde.themes.org used to be, until kde-look.org surpassed it (well, pretty much unilaterally replaced it as well), and now kde-look.org is listed.

You're arguing over a useful link to a good resource. I merely answered the technical reason as to why it isn't a kde.org site. Step back for a minute, and answer this question - "What is your point?"

>Step back for a minute, and answer this question - "What is your point?"

My point is clear : there is a useful external resource that is used by kde.org as an internal resource.

As all other internal resources are located at kde.org,
it would be more consistent if a request to apps.kde.org did not encounter an "unknown host" but a redirection page to apps.kde.com or whatever is most relevant.

This is not important if I'm the only one on this small earth to persist in typing the wrong URL.
This is more important if there are thousands of people doing the same mistake.

> Going down the "family" list, none of the following sites is in KDE's CVS or hosted on the "KDE" servers:

What is your definition of "KDE server"? Does private computers of KDE core developer count? What's with computers located in universities or KDE related companies? Where does "alien" start, where does it end?
And printing.kde.org is hosted in KDE's CVS.

Hey, I just said it was my casual rule of thumb... and I even mentioned that lists.kde.org isn't on there (although, to be honest, the dot isn't for the same reason - they are interactive, rather than published, you've listed webcvs twice, which along with lxr *is* the CVS, printing is in CVS, and the remaing kde.org is promo - I have no idea why that isn't in CVS. KDE-Look is like apps.kde.com - not run by KDE, but simply "best of breed" (which I also previously mentioned). I believe that kdeleague.org is running on a different server, and kdevelop.org existed before it was part of the KDE project, and probably hasn't been phased in.

Those are my guesses - as I said, it was a casual rule of thumb. And I'm employing ESR's famous "If you don't know, state your guess, and you'll get corrected", so I'm sure we'll find out the status of all those sites in the next few days. :)

That's funny to read that post.
I guess that this user is not using both KDE or Gnome. It's just a microsoft post.
The Kde and Gnome project are totally differents. In implementation, thinking or applications. I like both, but users can choose just one and ignore the other. The war between the 2 projects will never exists.

I can agree that having 2 projects means to code twice most applications. So the development can be slower than wanted by some users. But a little 'competition' improves a lot the functionality of each apps. I can't say that of closed system. At each upgrade, there is nothing new. My notepad or explorer still poors of functionality.

I don't like some systems. I don't use them. If you don't like KDE, don't use it and don't read news about it. I'm sure you will feel great

> The KDE project is famous for its funded and organised trolling of weblogs and
> message board associated with Linux and Free software/open source. Outrageous
> newbie impressing claims are made for the software and huge quanities of FUD
> are spread to destroy competitors. If this sounds familiar, then you are
> correct, most of these tactics were lifted straight from Microsoft's arsenal
> of dirty tricks. The Windows look and feel is not the only thing the KDE
> project has copied! In this short article I will address some of the lies and
> FUD spread by the KDE trolling teams. It is my hope that this, in some small
> way, will redress the balance and re-introduce two things almost eradicated by
> the KDE project: Honesty and facts.

shut up.

> * Myth #1 - KDE is more integrated than GNOME
>
> The oft-heard cry of the noisiest KDE advocates. No explanation is given, the
> reader is expected to simply grok the wholesomeness of KDE and the lack of
> this mystical quality in GNOME. It is nonsense of course. Neither desktop is
> particularly "integrated" compared to Windows XP, and certainly not compared
> any version of the Apple Mac. Whatever "integrated" actually means.

yeah but compared to the other named ones KDE is not a commercial product, where rich companies put millions of money into the project. they pay for scienctists, big companies that does marketing research and stuff.

> * Myth #2 - KDE is easier to use
>
> Again, such nebulous arguments are never explained, and the reader is expected
> to simply understand the truth of the zealots statement. Both KDE and GNOME
> have user-interface irritations (all systems do), but "ease of use" is not a
> simple thing to measure. KDE has never been subjected to detailed user
> testing, unlike GNOME [gnome.org], and the claims of user-friendliness are
> from crazed supporters and not average users. Furthermore, the KDE faithful
> rarely look beyond simple-minded copying of Windows, and forget that
> administering a desktop system is just as important as having widgets in the
> correct place on the toolbar. For example: What about application installation
> and removal? GNOME has the excellent RedCarpet by Ximian [ximian.com], which
> makes the installation, removal and updating of applications trivial. KDE
> users are expected to fend for themselves with brutal command line driven
> systems. GNOME also has the excellent Ximian setup tools to handle various
> tricky cross-platform and potentially risky system configuration operations.
> KDE offers none of this, only a few small half-assed Linux-only tools, which
> make no attempt at check-pointing to return to known working configurations.

you are mixing things here:

- redcarpet is a product by ximian. they move towards $$$ with redcarpet pro now to get some bucks for their support system.
- ximian is a company of its own they have NOTHING to do with GNOME. GNOME is an own project where some XIMIAN develops and depends on but generally we dont speak of XIMIAN GNOME (since XIMIAN is not the legitimate owner of GNOME)
- the idea behind redcarpet aint that bad but the problem is getting the packages just in time :)

> * Myth #3 - KDE is more popular
>
> In what sense? Arguably more people use KDE, but it is a close run thing. Most
> KDE zealots use the results of online polls as proof of their superior
> userbase - which is, quite frankly, complete and utter nonsense. Online polls
> are the joke of the century; it doesn't even require a motivated script kiddie
> to render then worthless. A single post alerting the faithful on a
> zealot-ridden site can skew the result so much it makes American presidential
> elections look fair and well organised. Popularity is also difficult to
> measure when *both* GNOME and KDE are frequently installed on the same system.
> The systems can co-exist and even run at the same time, except for certain
> applications such as panels. Many KDE users actually run GNOME applications
> for their superior features and stability, not realising that by doing so they
> are barely running KDE at all.

yes, and no one has anything against mixing systems and software. no one said anything negative about that. but thats the problem if people had worked on one desktop as we gonna repeat this here. then there would have been powerfull apps for that desktop so there would be no need to mix applications but no... someone needed to start another desktop and reinvent the wheel with the apps. now the unix community in general are 20 steps back.

> One of the few solid measures of popularity is commercial use of a desktop,
> and here, GNOME is far ahead with both Hewlett Packard and Sun committing to
> using GNOME as the desktop for their Unix systems. This also ties in with the
> previously mentioned ease of use. Sun's major contribution to the GNOME
> project is in the areas of user/developer documentation, testing, accessiblity
> and user-testing. Three of the less glamourous parts of desktop development.
> The arrival of the GNOME 2.x series will see these contributions reach
> fruitition and allow GNOME to make a quantum leap ahead of KDE in most of the
> basic computer/user issues.

- yeah and dont you see it now ?
- dont you see the eyewashing things behind it ?
- didnt god gave you a brain to use ?

sun, redhat, ximian... these 3 companies work on gnome. as you correctly said SUN is acting as beeing the OWNER of gnome now. you read a lot of mails on a couple of gnome mailinglist where they act like 'NAZIS' giving orders and tell people what to do and what not (instead asking quietly). sun is following their own business interests here e.g. substitution of CDE with GNOME 2 (anyone realized why gnome 2 comes up looking like CDE default installation ?). practically gnome is already under their control, people from outside who wants to contribute or want to bring in their own ideas are beeing rejected. its opensource but the roadmap is clear so forking it is getting impossible not to mention that the developerbase is a closed community.

now some problems:

ximian wants .NET and C#. sun the inventopr of JAVA. now dont you think both will collide when it comes to gnome 3 or gnome 4 ?

> * Myth #4 - Konqueror is the best Linux browser
>
> Oh for a penny every time this lie is told in any KDE story! Konqueror not a
> bad piece of software. It's authors deserve praise for the work done on it.
> However, the sheer amount of orgasmic gushing by the KDE faithful is
> completely out of proportion to its actual quality. It is quite unreliable
> and even simple standards compliant pages can crash it quite comprehensively
> It is also lax in its support of basic web standards compared to either
> Mozilla or Opera. It is also extremely slow - much slower than the latest
> incarnations of the GNOME Nautilus filemanager/browser (a target of much KDE
> FUD during its development).

you are a clueless person.

- konqueror is more than a browser it integrates browser, filemanager in a nice plugin system way AND it is FASTER than NAUTILUS. ask me i have tested all 3 versions. nautilus for gnome 1, nautilus for gnome 2 and konqueror for kde 3.
- nautilus on the otherhand is STILL unusable. ok definately faster under gnome 2 but accessing the menues with the changed new widgetset is QUITE UEBERSLOW. still not compareable to konqueror.

but dont worry, kde 3 offers a browser and filemanager at least. we on gnome 2 can wait months before we get a halfway usable browser not to mention that nautilus still sucks. if you dont belive me wait until the official release dates then you see how many persons actually rant about that.

> * Myth #5 - KDE applications are better/more advanced than GNOME ones due to
> the ease of developing in C++ using the Qt toolkit
>
> See also: Qt/TrollTech. This is the most common wail heard by KDE developers,
> and yet it is easily disproved by looking at the actual applications for
> GNOME/GTK and KDE/Qt. KDE applications often have larger version numbers than
> GNOME ones... an old trick played by commerical software developers. Most KDE
> apps seem to jump for 1.x releases long before they are ready - KOffice being
> the best example. None of the components in Koffice are worthy of a 1.0
> release, let alone 1.1 or 1.2.

then get your ass moving and enchance the software. not to mention that using a OOP programminglanguage is the best decission for writing an entire DE the QT widgetsset is more enchanced QT3 with its new database support etc.

> GNOME applications get much more testing in their 0.x stages and despite
> shorter development phases they mature and reach stable featureful release
> states much more quickly. Some examples of this are: the superb Evolution
> (groupware/email), Gnumeric (spreadsheet), Pan (newsreader), The GIMP (image
> manipulation), Abiword (word processing), RedCarpet, X-Chat (IRC client), XMMS
> (media player), Galeon (web browser), and for developers: Glade and Anjuta.
> All of these packages ooze quality, and far outclass their KDE counterparts.
> It is no understatement to say that GNOME is at least 18 months ahead of KDE
> in applications, and pulling still further ahead.

sorry did you say testing ? dude i am into that shit better than you. lets pic that stuff out.

- evolution, ximian product. its gpl'ed but the exchange server support is what matters. thats the purpose why evolution is so (more or less good it is still full of bugs and the addressbook is worthless). ximian paid the evolution hackers to do this product for free they get the money from selling exchange stuff to customers and companies.

- oki gnumeric is perfect. no doubt.
- pan is GTK only so its not gnome related.
- the gimp is GTK only so its not gnome related.
- abiword is GTK with some support of GNOME mainly done by abisoftware a company that pay their employee so abiword finally is not gnome related it doesnt support the gnome framework at all.
- redcarpet: see evolution.
- xchat the chatclient with the most problems ever but oki i am using it myself now.
- XMMS is not gnome related.
- GALEON is indeed a good BROWSERFRONTEND but thats almost all on gnome i need to start 2 apps galeon to browse and nautilus to manage files on kde i have konqueror 2 things in one app not to mention it is mozilla independant. wait until gnome 2 comes out then wait another couple of months until the GECKO engine of mozilla is ported to gtk2+ currently mozilla native is ported to gtk2 but it still requires glib1 (so i need to install gtk1/glib1 and gtk2/glib2) to get mozilla compiled using gtk2. not to mention that the embedded gtk mozilla part is not yet done. blizzard is investigating into these things but they are not done and as long as this is not done as long you dont get a new galeon 2 for gnome 2. (oki galeon 2 is under development its nearly finished now because they #ifdef'ed the mozilla components out. temporarely you see a window with menues and full galeon support but no rendering engine in the middle of the window)

> It's not only in the area of user applications that GNOME is vastly more
> advanced. With the forthcoming 2.x release, a number of impressive behind the
> scenes technologies will finally mature: component technology (bonobo), media
> (Gstreamer), internationalisation (pango). As a developement platform, GNOME
> 2.x is, conservatively, 2-3 years ahead of KDE. And what is more, because it
> is not tied to a lowest common denominator cross-platform bloat-fest like the
> Qt toolkit, the lead (as with applications) can only increase further.

seriously no one belives this. even apes wont belive you. 2-3 years ahead ? 2-3 years back yes. gnome 2 will be slower than gnome 1 from UI usage. a lot of ports cant be done correctly just in time for gnome 2 so they mainly port some stuff now (because they are under highly pressure now) sure they have written a a lot of stuff new and changed a lot of the framework, doesnt change the fact that it is never 2-3 years ahead. while you stick on a gnome 2 desktop with no serious basic programs for a while (like email client and browser) you can use KDE3 fine without problems. all necessary applications are there already and you dont care if 1-2 applications still needs a while. on gnome you need to wait for the BITTER NEEDED tools. even gnome developers tell you to use gnome 1 with gnome 2 together. what crappy idea is this ? so why does one want gnome 2 at all if he still requires running gnome 1 to get his beloved applications running. even your beloved evolution (soon 1.2 will be out with soup and .NET) support wont be ported to gnome 2 until evolution 1.4 is out (which takes another couple of shit months).

> Yet despite all this, we are still regularly fed the lie that Qt and C++ makes
> application and desktop development easier. Judge for yourself.

i judged and my conclusion is that you are wrong.

> * Myth #6 - KDE is faster and takes less memory than GNOME
>
> KDE is written in C++. While this is not necessarily a problem, it can be when
> Visual Basic reject programmers (which the KDE project is overrun with) do not
> know enough to avoid important pitfalls that plague C++ software projects.
> Stupid use of autoincrementing operators and iteration with C++ objects; and
> masses of unnecessary allocations and deallocations of memory are two of the
> most common. KDE suffers badly from both problems.

not to speak writing a widgetset in C like GTK that does raceconditions on the system over and over. not to mention about the garbage collector stuff within kde. a lot of gnome applications are leaking memory over and over because the coders are dump jerks.

> Perhaps the most cretinous of all problems is blaming the extremely slow
> startup times of KDE apps on GCC. The GNOME 1.x releases were hardly svelt
> (2.x fixes many of these issues), but GNOME is a fashion cat-walk superwaif
> when compared to KDE's 500lb fat-momma cheese-burger scoffing trailer trash.
> One need only look at the recent fuss over ugly KDE hacks (such as prelinking)
> used to bandage up the design and coding flaws in the decrepit KDE
> architecture to see the truth.

try some sex dude.

> * Myth #7 - GNOME development is slower. KDE releases faster.
>
> Fundamental misunderstanding. The KDE project releases as one big lump of code
> due to its use of C++ and the many problems this causes with libraries. The
> project bumps the version number of the entire KDE system for the smallest
> modifications. GNOME, on the other hand is componentized and each component
> releases on a (almost) separate schedule, bumping it's own version number but
> not the main GNOME version (1.4, for example). Occasional releases of the
> entire GNOME system happen, and that's when the GNOME version number is bumped
> (currently it is at 1.4). To see this in action, use RedCarpet and you will
> regular updates to GNOME components. GNOME development is not slower, it is in
> fact faster and more advanced. Lamers and newbies, however, fail to understand
> the advantages of this method and just see KDE 1.1.1 followed a few weeks
> later by KDE 1.1.2. Wow! KDE roolz.

hahaha you gave me a final laugh dude:

i like the way kde release stuff. they take their time, get the stuff working and do some intensive testing before releasing packages. gnome in the otherside does exactly the different here an example of gnome-utils changelof for gnome 1.4:

what i want to say is they change some minor fucking unworthy to mention things and bump the version. same for gnumeric once you get gnumeric compiled and installed, go to ftp.gnome.org and leech another new version.

> * Myth #8 - The Qt toolkit is cross-platform and yet takes advantage of each
> individual platform
>
> The Qt toolkit (the software at the heart of KDE) is supposedly a
> cross-platform toolkit allowing the lucky developer the opportunity to write
> Windows/Linux/Mac software all at once. And yet, among the magical mythical
> claims made, the most nonsensical is that it makes applications which take
> advantage of the distinct features of the different platforms. This is of
> course, nonsense. Qt is a bloated, slow layer that is slapped over a native
> system's APIs in an attempt to make all the systems look alike. It no more
> takes advantage of Linux/Windows/Mac than Java does - in fact it offers many
> of the disadvantages of Java with few of the advantages. If you have ever
> wondered why the KDE desktop looks so much like Windows... you need look no
> further than Qt. Qt is a lowest common denominator toolkit, and that LCD is
> Windows - Trolltech's, the creator of Qt, real market.

at least you can port qt and kde apps. look on gnome it depends on so many different programminglanguages, it depends on so many other (wherever you get them applications) that you need ages to get a basic system ported to either windows and wherever.

> * Myth #9 - TrollTech is a friend of Free software
>
> To Be Written. Ideas: Qt started out as non-Free. KDE developers knew this
> violated the GPL, didn't care, stole others' GPL code by porting it to link
> (in violation of the license) with Qt and are therefore untrustworthy. KDE
> core developers work for TrollTech. Expensive per developer licensing for
> writing closed-source with Qt, and hence KDE. Trolltech only moved towards the
> GPL because of the success of GNOME. Labyrinthine licensing nightmare (3
> licenses to deal with). Gradual migration of features belonging in KDE into Qt
> (and so into TrollTech's IP portfolio), allowing easy porting of apps to the
> revenue generating Windows world (see TheKompany for a perfect example),
> thereby making KDE an irrelevant launcher of Qt applications. Claims made that
> Qt is GPL, while true, hide the real truth. There cannot be a real fork of Qt
> for the KDE project: Core developers work for Trolltech; any fork would need
> to be full GPL and hence ban any closed-source apps from KDE altogether (all
> KDE apps must link with Qt); Any commerical licensees of Qt (non-GPL) would
> and could only follow TrollTech. KDE is stitched up good and proper.

you are totally clueless once again you proof it.

some years back there was only 2-3 widgetsets out one of them was the leading MOTIF widgetset which was closed source and during this time outdated. people tried to write a DE and searched for a OOP compatible widgetset so they found their way to QT which filled all their needs. sure QT during this time wanted to earn some money or do you think a company could exists, feed their family and pay the bills by writing free software ? thats plain sick and plain wrong. we should be thankfull to trolltech that they offer QT under a GPL compatible license now and you fuckign shithead have nothing better to do than piss around. what kinda asshole are you ?

You've taken a horrendously unneeded "Linux is world" attitude. Perhaps GuhNome is easier to setup and install and use on Linux. Posts previous to yours seems to indicate it is not. However, I can attest to how hard it is to get GuhNome setup (properly?) on FreeBSD. Then again I don't have the patience to download all of the dependencies for GuhNome.

Second. C++. Learn to love it. Quite frankly KDE doesn't seem all that slow. And I'm running a 2xP2-450 w/ a FreeBSD -current kernel. Hardly optimized for SMP, hardly quick, but for sure after disabling the "WITNESS" code it's very useable. Sure symbol mangling is a bitch. But what freakin genius decided that it was a good idea to cram zen and the art of object oriented OBJECTS into a functional language? Perhaps someone is trying to fellate the ego of the preprocessor author? Sheesh.

Thirdly. Stop knocking on any resemblance to Windows. Oddly enough Win98+MSIE+Word allow me to get a whole lot more work done than Leenuchs or FreeBSD plus whatever silly graphical UI. Just because something is a thinly veiled immitation of something else (which I don't see as true in KDE's case) - doesn't make it bad. Ask ten shoe wearing pedestrians what they think of when they think of old school rap. Sugarhill Gang: Rapper's Delight. That managed to jack the bass line off of an average disco song as well as a bunch of lyrics from other sources. But it still gets ya going, and it still went a long way to putting hip hop in the limelight.